SynthesisBMJ open2020
Physicians' perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars: a systematic review.
Synthesis in BMJ open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
70 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Facilitators and barriers to generic and biosimilar medications in the Middle East and North Africa: insights from physicians and pharmacists-a systematic review.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Pooled it
- Biosimilar monoclonal antibodies for cancer treatment in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Barriers and Enablers Affecting the Uptake of Biosimilar Medicines Viewed Through the Lens of Actor Network Theory: A Systematic Review.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2024Pooled it
- Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor biosimilars for neovascular age-related macular degeneration.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Patients' Perceptions of Biosimilars: A Systematic Review.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2023Pooled it
- Pharmacists' Perspectives of Biosimilars: A Systematic Review.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Efficacy and immunogenicity of insulin biosimilar compared to their reference products: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC endocrine disorders · 2022Pooled it
- Is There Any Research Evidence Beyond Surveys and Opinion Polls on Automatic Substitution of Biological Medicines? A Systematic Review.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2021Pooled it
- Perceptions and Preferences for Defining Biosimilar Products in Prescription Drug Promotion.Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine : JABFM · 2025Trial
- Application of Actor Network Theory to Evaluate Supply and Demand Strategies Used to Encourage International Biosimilar Uptake.Pharmaceutical medicine · 2026Review
- Early real-world utilization of ADA-adaz (Hyrimoz) in the United States: A retrospective claims-based descriptive study.Medicine · 2026Article
- Comparing the pharmacokinetics of adalimumab originator and biosimilar product in patients with Inflammatory bowel disease or autoimmune disease.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2026Article
- Navigating the Transition: A Scoping Review of System-Level Factors in Biosimilar Integration for Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2026Article
- Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) agents for neovascular age-related macular degeneration (nAMD): a network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026Article
- Evolution of Approaches to the Development, Life Cycle Control, and Interchangeability of Veterinary Biosimilars Based on Hemoproteins (with a Focus on Cytochrome C).Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Temporal Trends in the Prescription of Biosimilars and the Status of Switching from Original Biologics to Biosimilars at Individual and Institutional Levels in Japan.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2025Article
- Barriers to adoption of biosimilar insulins in Europe: A mixed-methods study.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
- A single-centre analysis of a biosimilar switching programme for adalimumab in inflammatory bowel disease.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Real world evidence of insulin and biosimilar insulin therapy-Opportunities to improve adherence, outcomes and cost-effectiveness.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Review
- Real-world familiarity with US biosimilar regulatory guidelines and interchangeability state laws among pharmacists and physicians treating immunological disorders.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2025Article
10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo examine physicians' perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars.
designSystematic review. DATA SOURCES: MedLine Ovid and Scopus databases at the end of 2018. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Original scientific studies written in English that addressed physicians' perceptions of the uptake of biosimilars. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The search resulted in altogether 451 studies and 331 after removing duplicates. Two researchers examined these based on the title, abstract and entire text, resulting in 20 studies. The references in these 20 studies were screened and three further studies were included. The data of these 23 studies were extracted. All the publications were quality assessed by two researchers.
resultsMost of the selected studies were conducted in Europe and commonly used short surveys. Physicians' familiarity with biosimilars varied: 49%-76% were familiar with biosimilars while 2%-25% did not know what biosimilars were, the percentages varying from study to study. Their measured knowledge was generally more limited compared with their self-assessed knowledge. Physicians' perceptions of biosimilars also varied: 54%-94% were confident prescribing biosimilars, while 65%-67% had concerns regarding these medicines. Physicians seemed to prefer originator products to biosimilars and prescribed biosimilars mainly for biologic-naive patients. They considered cost savings and the lower price compared with the originator biologic medicine as the main advantages of biosimilars, while their doubts were often related to safety, efficacy and immunogenicity. 64%-95% of physicians had negative perceptions of pharmacist-led substitution of biologic medicines.
conclusionsPhysicians' knowledge of and attitudes towards biosimilars vary. Although physicians had positive attitudes towards biosimilars, prescribing was limited, especially for patients already being treated with biologic medicines. Perceptions of pharmacist-led substitution of biologic medicines were often negative. Education and national recommendations for switching and substitution of biologic medicines are needed to support the uptake of biosimilars.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.